Blood has one of the highest regeneration rates in the human body, producing 1 × 1012 cells per day in the adult human bone marrow1. Hematopoietic stem cells (HSCs) guarantee blood production over the lifespan by the process of hematopoiesis and are defined by their capacity to produce all blood cell types (multipotentiality) while maintaining themselves (self-renewal). Historically, the gold standard for testing the function of an HSC has always relied on transplantation, testing the ability of a donor population to reconstitute all blood lineages of a mouse long-term (commonly defined as a minimum of 20 weeks)2. A large body of functional work spanning several decades has demonstrated that the HSC compartment is heterogeneous in both lineage output and long-term reconstitution. The toolkit to study hematopoiesis has expanded considerably over the years, with many new techniques, including in vitro single-cell functional assays, single-cell -omics approaches, and lineage tracing3. The latter have conclusively demonstrated that the contributions of HSC and multipotent progenitors largely differ in native hematopoiesis and under the stress imposed by transplantation. All these techniques complement transplantation assays, which remain important to assess the long-term repopulation capacity of HSCs. In the context of the study of human hematopoiesis, xenotransplantation provides the only method to experimentally assess self-renewal in a whole-organism setting.
Xenotransplantation of HSCs is commonly performed using intravenous injection of cells into immunocompromised mice. However, HSCs are rare4 and access to human samples containing HSCs is limited. In 2003, the group of John Dick adapted a protocol for bone marrow aspiration and intrafemorally injected non-obese diabetic/severe combined immunodeficiency (NOD-SCID) mice with Lin−CD34+ umbilical cord blood (CB) cells5. To our knowledge, there has been no reported formal comparison of intravenous versus intrafemoral injections in long-term and serial transplantation outcomes. However, compared directly with intravenous injections, intrafemoral injections provide larger graft sizes with the same number of transplanted cells6, at least in the short term. In addition, engraftment can be detected with many fewer hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells (HSPCs) transplanted. This is thought to be because intrafemoral delivery bypasses the need for HSCs to home to the bone marrow, which in the xenograft context is limiting due to a lack of cross-species reactivity for a number of receptors and cytokines. Via the use of intrafemoral injections, Notta and colleagues were the first to transplant single human HSCs7, though extra considerations need to be taken, as described in their methods. Intrafemoral delivery of HSPCs also has limitations. The injection itself disrupts and destroys part of the bone marrow, and therefore is not indicated for studies of the crosstalk between HSCs and their bone marrow microenvironment. Additionally, the maximum number of cells is limited by the volume of that bone cavity and that may be too few for some applications. As with every technique, its application in a specific experiment needs to be weighed up based on the benefits/disadvantages and the question being asked. In the context of xenotransplantation, if the aim of the experiment is to test the engraftment of a low number of human HSPCs with no assessment of microenvironment, intrafemoral delivery is usually preferred over intravenous injection.